Super Bowl 60 delivered thrilling football action as Seattle toppled New England, but Madison Avenue’s battle for viewer attention proved just as dramatic.
Advertisers shelled out a staggering $10 million for just 30 seconds of airtime during Sunday’s championship game.
That eye-watering price tag doesn’t include the additional millions spent crafting commercials, hiring celebrity talent, and marketing campaigns leading up to game day.
Northwestern University’s Kellogg School of Management has released its highly anticipated annual rankings, revealing which brands scored touchdowns and which fumbled their multi-million dollar opportunities.
Google Clinches Top Honors With Emotional AI Showcase
Google’s commercial for its Gemini artificial intelligence service earned the coveted top spot in Kellogg’s post-game breakdown. The ad titled “New Home” struck gold by masterfully blending emotional storytelling with practical product demonstration.
The commercial featured a mother and young son using Gemini to visualize their new house transformed with fresh paint, a reimagined child’s bedroom, and an inviting garden. Adorable elements including a baby, charming house, and faithful family dog amplified the emotional appeal.
This ad captures what Google has historically done best: pairing genuine emotional storytelling with a clear illustration of how the product fits naturally into people’s lives.
Tim Calkins, clinical professor of marketing and co-lead of the Kellogg School Super Bowl Advertising Review, praised Google’s approach.
The Kellogg panel, which evaluates commercials using letter grades from A through F based on marketing effectiveness, awarded Google’s spot a pristine “A.”
Coinbase Crashes With Confusing Message
On the opposite end of the spectrum, Coinbase’s Super Bowl spot earned a failing grade from the prestigious business school review panel.
The cryptocurrency exchange’s commercial featured a Backstreet Boys song with karaoke-style lyrics but completely failed to communicate what Coinbase actually does. Viewers were left scratching their heads about why they might want to use the platform—or even that it had anything to do with cryptocurrency at all.
The stripped-down approach backfired spectacularly, demonstrating that cleverness without clarity equals wasted millions.
What Made This Year’s Winners Stand Out
According to Northwestern’s analysis, 2025’s most effective Super Bowl advertisements shared common traits that separated them from forgettable efforts.
Winning commercials delivered either emotional resonance or humor—ideally both—while simultaneously demonstrating product utility. Audiences needed to feel something AND understand what they were being sold.
Beyond Google’s “A” grade, several other brands excelled in their Super Bowl 60 efforts:
- Bosch crafted messaging that resonated with viewers while showcasing product benefits
- Novartis successfully balanced pharmaceutical messaging with engaging storytelling
- Anthropic’s Claude AI platform demonstrated capabilities without overwhelming audiences
- Michelob ULTRA maintained its brand identity while creating memorable moments
TurboTax, Pepsi, Levi’s, and even promotional spots for the NFL itself rounded out the top-tier “A” grade category.
Middle-of-the-Pack Performers
Dozens of brands landed in the “B” and “C” categories, indicating solid but unspectacular efforts that likely justified their investment without creating cultural moments.
Tech giants Microsoft and Meta both received “B” grades for their AI-focused commercials, suggesting competent execution that nonetheless failed to capture imaginations like Google managed.
Food and beverage brands dominated the middle rankings. Lay’s, Budweiser, Red Bull, and Liquid Death all earned “B” grades, while Pringles, Nerds, Dunkin’, and Bud Light settled into “C” territory.
Even OpenAI, despite massive public interest in artificial intelligence, couldn’t crack better than a “C” grade for its Super Bowl debut.
Costly Mistakes and Wasted Opportunities
Multiple advertisers squandered their premium placement with commercials that confused, bored, or failed to connect with audiences.
Nine brands received “D” grades, signaling serious marketing missteps. Ritz, Poppi, Instacart, Redfin/Rocket, Salesforce, Svedka, and Volkswagen all struggled to justify their massive expenditures.
Religious campaign “He Gets Us” and political effort “The MAHA Center” also landed in failing territory with “D” grades.
Coinbase stood alone with its “F” rating, representing perhaps the most expensive fumble of Super Bowl 60.
Lessons From Advertising’s Biggest Stage
Super Bowl advertising remains one of marketing’s highest-stakes arenas. With costs approaching $10 million for 30 seconds, brands cannot afford ambiguity or missed connections.
Northwestern’s annual review reveals that successful commercials balance entertainment value with clear product messaging. Viewers should walk away feeling something—joy, nostalgia, inspiration—while also understanding exactly what they’ve been shown and why it matters to their lives.
Google’s victory demonstrates that even tech companies can create warm, human-centered stories when they focus on real-world applications rather than technical specifications.
Coinbase’s failure serves as cautionary tale: cleverness without clarity wastes everyone’s time and mountains of money. Audiences willing to watch commercials during football’s biggest game deserve to understand what they’re being offered.
As advertising costs continue climbing and attention spans keep shrinking, brands face increasing pressure to deliver immediate impact. Super Bowl 60’s winners proved it’s still possible—but only with authentic emotion paired with crystal-clear messaging.